A.P. Sahi, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Rajeev Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri I.P. Singh and Sri S.N. Tripathi for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and Sri Saurav Basu for respondent Nos. 5 to 7. It is not necessary to issue notice to respondent No. 8 and the said Officer has also been reportedly transferred.
(2.) After the matter was heard, the dispute was brought within a very narrow compass. An order was passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on 1.9.2008. The petitioner alleges that the same was ex-parte to the petitioner and, therefore, a recall application was moved on 23.9.2008. The said recall application has been rejected, and aggrieved, the petitioner has come up before this Court that the order is erroneous and that the entire proceedings are in violation of principles of natural justice.
(3.) On this short argument Sri S.N. Tripathi, Sri B.K. Solanki, Sri I. P. Singh and Sri Saurav Basu, who represent all the contesting respondents, have conceded that the order impugned may be set aside keeping in view the direction of the High Court dated 15.9.2008. Accordingly, in view of this admitted position to which the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 has no objection, the order impugned dated 1.11.2008 is set aside with the direction to Deputy Director of Consolidation concerned to hear the application dated 23.9.2008 on merits and proceed to pass an appropriate order keeping in view the directions contained. In the order dated 15.9.2008.;